It is still a controversial question of whether Thomas is literarily dependent on the canonical gospels, or a gospel harmony, rather than representing an independent sayings tradition in its own right. Different scholars hold different positions on this issue; Craig Evans views Thomas as as a whole as late in composition because it contains Matthean and Lukan redactions, possibly via the Diatessaron, whereas April DeConick distinguishes accretions (which may have been influenced by the canonical gospels) from an earlier substratum that is oral and not dependent on the synoptics. I find this argument somewhat persuasive since Thomas is replete with oral features that do not suggest strict literary dependence.
Spong: "Why We Must Reclaim The Bible From Fundamentalists"
by leavingwt 87 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
PSacramento
True, there are many things unique to Thomas, but could that have been from later (gnostic) editing of an original that was basically a Syriac version of the Diatessaron ?
-
sizemik
Just because some men decided that the bible canon is correct...does it make it so? How do we know that they weren't actually the liars? . . . still thinking.
Chances are they were. They certainly had less than an altruistic agenda. Those that canonised the bible were no different than anybody else in that respect.
So just what is it that Spong wants to reclaim? . . . the actual canonised bible books themselves? . . . or is it simply another way of saying "my understanding is more correct than yours."
The problems do not lie completely with different interpretations . . . many lie with the book itself . . . which is why thousands of different agendas over the years have attempted to lay claim to it. Our modern-day fundies are just the current crop. The question remains . . . what has it got? . . . what is it about it that makes it so desirable to fight over all this time?
-
PSacramento
The canonization process was not that controversial, they just confirmed the books that they already VIEWED as authoritive.
Those books did NOT become authoritive because they became canon, they became canon because they were authoritive.
The only real issue, if I recall, was Revelation and the order of the books too.
-
still thinking
That is correct PSac...they viewed them as authoritive...but who are they? and what makes them so right?
I think they have chosen the best fit for what they want to believe.
-
PSacramento
That is correct PSac...they viewed them as authoritive...but who are they? and what makes them so right?
The various heads of the various churches and what made them right?
No one said they were right.
I think they have chosen the best fit for what they want to believe.
They choose the books that the vast majority of them ( the leaders and infulential people in the churchs at the time) already viewed as authortive based on the citeria that had been used for centuries as thsoe books were passed down.
The believed what they believed because of those books, the b ooks did not come to be because they believed.
-
THE GLADIATOR
It seems that up to date Christians have moved away from the idea that the Bible is the Word of God. So why not let Fundamentalists keep the Bible.
Christians who do not accept the Bible as God Word could compile a new fresh book based on their present understanding of God and his purpose in our day. It could include the parts that talk about Christ as the Word and more recent and relevant experiences from the time we live in.
It would save all this arguing about the value of the Bible. There would then be a clear distinction between Bible Christians and Living Word Christians. In case anyone should think I am being sarcastic let me assure you I am not. Having two different groups of Christians with conflicting ideas about the Bible and using the same book is not credible.
-
Terry
We want what we want.
And when we badly WANT we find tend to find it, seize it and cling to it desperately.
We want life and happiness and we want it FOREVER!
Where can you find it? Well, you can't.
The next best thing is to find something that offers a PROMISE and a basis for hope.
Once that is allowed into place the rest is easy.
Because we live in a society that is surrounded by technology and science it becomes embarrassing to cling to mere belief or hope without some RATIONAL prop attached.
Consequently, fundamentalist religious believers get into deep doo doo.
They tend to pretend they have actual reasons supported by reality for what they want to believe.
When they open their mouth to explain these 'rational' reasons it sounds like the braying of an ass.
The facts are reduced to hearsay from a long time ago.
I say: stop pretending your Faith is about facts of reality and just admit you are stubbornly clinging to HOPE because you don't want to die.
Be done with it.
Otherwise, you end up in unsupportable arguments that make you look very foolish.
I know. I was a part of an ongoing argument called Jehovah's Witnesses where I never listened; I only waited for my turn to talk.
-
myelaine
dear THE GLADIATOR...
you said: "So why not let Fundamentalists keep the Bible. Having two different groups of Christians with conflicting ideas about the Bible and using the same book is not credible."...
the whole idea is to get people to "drift" from the paramount message in the bible (we have already been judged by God as sinners deserving of death, complete banishment from the presence of His holiness and in need of a Saviour) and the best way to do that is to divide and conquer...in that way both the bible and the "fundimentalists" lose credibility.(disunity+)
there are the "fundimentalists" and there are the believers like those in john 8:31,37,40,43,52,55,59 who believed, then when Jesus wanted to teach them more about sin they got indignant because they were children of abraham(faith)...they thought they knew God but Jesus said basicly they didn't, they were liars...they wanted to kill Him whereas abraham knew that God would provide a sacrifice in substitution. We see the same thing today with others who don't want to "hear" the paramount message in the bible. These want to and slowly are "re-branding" Jesus into some sort of love guru.
the day will come when the paramount message will no longer be preached because it is easier to "drift" with the current than guard what was delivered to the saints...according to prophesy...revelation 13:7
love michelle
-
designs
'Antisemitism In The New Testament' by Lillian C. Freudmann